User talk:S@bre/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions with User:S@bre. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archives

June 2007 – August 2007 September 2007 – December 2007 January 2008 – March 2008 April 2008 – July 2008 August 2008 – September 2008 October 2008 – December 2008 January 2009 – February 2009 March 2009 – November 2009 December 2009 – February 2010 March 2010 – December 2010

Hi S@bre! I've noticed you're pretty adamant about keeping the Sam & Max Save the World#Plot the way it is. I agree that, as prose, it reads well. However, Wikipedia is a reference work, so I think it would be beneficial if a reader could discern where an episode's plot starts and ends, without having to guess or refer to the next section. For example, if I'm playing the game, I may want to read the plot only for the first episode to get a feel for it, and have a choice to not look at the plot for the second episode, as I may not want to know any more in advance. Not marking the starts and ends of episodes takes this choice away from the reader -- at least, that's how I felt when I looked up the page halfway through playing Season 1. I agree, though, that the section headings are ugly. Here are some possible compromise solutions:

1. Use paragraph titles instead of section headings. Example:

Episode 1: "Culture Shock"

The game opens with Sam and Max lounging in their office [...] With the Soda Poppers brutally beating Culture, Sam and Max consider their work done.

Episode 2: "Situation: Comedy"

The next case the Freelance Police gets involves liberating a studio audience held hostage by a TV talk show host.

2. Same, except inline with the text:

Episode 1: "Culture Shock" The game opens with Sam and Max lounging in their office [...] With the Soda Poppers brutally beating Culture, Sam and Max consider their work done.

Episode 2: "Situation: Comedy" The next case the Freelance Police gets involves liberating a studio audience held hostage by a TV talk show host.

3. Parenthetical, in context:

The game opens (Episode 1: "Culture Shock") with Sam and Max lounging in their office [...] With the Soda Poppers brutally beating Culture, Sam and Max consider their work done. The next case (Episode 2: "Situation: Comedy") the Freelance Police gets involves liberating a studio audience held hostage by a TV talk show host.

4. Any of the above in boldface instead of italic, for better visibility.

5. Separate episode plots into their own articles, as in Sam & Max Beyond Time and Space. Probably an overkill at this point.

Anyways, I'm not trying to be a hardass about this but in my opinion there really is an issue here that needs addressing, that it needs to be clear for a casual reader where the plot of one episode starts and where it ends. By "casual" I mean one who expects to get this information from the "Plot" section without having to piece it together from the rest of the article. Yes, this duplicates information, but in this case I think the redundancy is justified because the two sections (Plot and Episodes) have different purposes (plot overview vs release information) and it makes sense for each to be self-contained. Miranche (talk) 21:26, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Agreed! Re: Sam & Max Beyond Time and Space, I support the idea of making the central article more informative but I kind of like the separate articles for the episodes. The extended plot summaries are helpful (congrats to whoever wrote them in such detail while not revealing solutions to specific puzzles) and the "Cultural references" sections are IMO appropriate, adding to the understanding & experience of the game. A single article cannot accommodate either.

Anyways, just my 5c. Miranche (talk) 23:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. At some point I'll probably put some effort in getting more familiar with the discussions & policies regarding cultural references ("trivia") but I get the gist. Btw the fan wiki seems to now be here. Miranche (talk) 23:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Can you clarify why you're protecting this line? The article does indeed claim that the crisis caused Ghost to be shelved, but that's not in accordance with what we previously understood and it's highly unlikely a British rag would have any special insight to the matter. And if they did they didn't include it in the report. 69.92.198.92 (talk) 22:52, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

This passed, so your FT(s) need more articles featured by 1 September 2010, or else they will become GTs - rst20xx (talk) 21:03, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I'll try and look some stuff up for LeChuck when I can, I'm tied up as hell and only able to work in bursts lately. Of the trio he might be one of the more difficult.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:19, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that; totally misread the line as having LeChuck in place of Guybrush. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 06:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey, as I noted at Kung Fu Man's talk page at User_talk:Kung_Fu_Man#Resident_Evil_characters, I have been working on a master reference list of all the top ten lists that appear in published magazines that could be helpful if anyone is interested? Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 21:04, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you sincerely for the barnstar and the kind words. I have opened a peer review for the article if you would like to participate. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:26, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

The whole game is about using eco[Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy]. You can't just take that information out, Jak uses eco throughout all the games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MyChemicalRomance1302 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 2, No. 6 — 4th Quarter, 2009
Previous issue | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q4 2009, the project has:

130 Featured Articles 35 Featured Lists 13 Featured Topics

35 A-Class Articles 347 Good Articles 4 Good Topics

---

Content

Changes to Featured and Good content News items and announcements

Editorial: Being bold Featured editor: PresN

---

Project Navigation

• VG Project Main pages

  • Main project – talk
  • Project category – talk
  • Portal – talk

  VG Project Departments

  • Assessment – talk
  • Cleanup – talk
  • Peer review – talk

   

  • Reference library – talk
  • Newsletter – talk
  • Video game images – talk

To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

• Newsletter delivery by xenobot 21:21, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe that I have addressed all of your concerns, and the article is ready for another look. I'm still looking for a picture, but as you said, that isn't required. --PresN 18:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Got it ready. Email me if you're still interested. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 18:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC))

Thanks for the semi-protect, but you may want to set an expiry. –xeno^talk 20:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I look back over the history of IP edits in the article over the last few months, and only a handful aren't being reverted as unproductive, pointless of otherwise as vandalism. Certainly with this blighter's recent tenacity, I think we can justify indefinate for the time being. -- Sabre (talk) 21:06, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I've added the points you left on my talk page the the review. Talk:Call of Duty: World at War/GA3 -- thanks for the input! --Teancum (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

hi there, ill get straight to the point, i actually asked Nintendo us when they think chapter 5 would get released on wiiware and they said they had a vague idea of either 02/01/2010 or 02/08/2010, they also mentioned the eu version would be released shortly after. I presume there is some copyright issues or something going but i think you should make a penultimate edit by just stating "February 2010" for US and "March 2010" for EU and then when you find official dates make a final edit etc.

btw i usually come here to check up on the release date so could you pop me a reply when you find official dates

thanks, TRG —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRedGoldfish (talk • contribs) 21:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

---found info---

ok i found a website related to the official wiiware release date for US http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/106/1065388p1.html which will tell it IS in fact February 1, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRedGoldfish (talk • contribs) 21:17, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

I just want to thank you for helping us keep Claire's page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smalln (talk • contribs) 15:32, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I would like to say that the release date you have posted for the EU Chapter 5 is in fact false as I have logged onto the wii shopping channel and it is not there - try setting it to next week or just put "February/March 2010" :)

I don't want to edit it myself in case I get in trouble

Anyway thanks for your time, Mr. Scott M Davidson 16:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRedGoldfish (talk • contribs)

Placed on hold pending just one issue that needs to be addressed. See Talk:Steve Purcell/GA2. –MuZemike 04:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

He believe he was messing about the the AfD to make a point over some drama on the Aperture Science article. Rehevkor ✉ 02:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

No, I was not attempting to make a point; You see, I was naïve, and believed that page was unnecessary, and could be merged with the Portal page. The page, that gives only vague information about GLaDOS. Anyway, I'd suppose it's all part of the learning process. Mastado (talk) 03:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Regarding this: if the gameplay relates to Brood War in particular (i.e., if it wasn't so popular until Brood War came out, or something like that), then it certainly isn't clear from the text. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 14:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)